Posted
by
samzenpus
on Monday June 16, 2014 @02:30PM
from the the-right-way-to-go dept.

An anonymous reader writes in with news about proposed rules regarding mapping technology used in cars.Many are in favor of rules that prevent texting while driving, but in-car navigation is a murkier legal area — how do you minimize distractions without limiting the ability to get from point A to point B? Like it or not, the US government may settle that debate before long. The proposed Grow America Act would let the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) set rules for dash-mounted GPS units, smartphone mapping apps and anything else you'd use for driving directions. While it's not clear what the NHTSA would do with its power, the Department of Transportation's voluntary guidelines ask for limits on eye-catching visuals (think videos) and interaction times; don't be surprised if these enter the rulebooks.

We've had electric cars since the late 1800s they were even more popular than gas until cost outweighs the benefit.

The electric car of the late 1890s and beyond was most likely to be a literal horseless carriage or coach-and-four, and, with handcrafted body work priced in the thousands, unadjusted for inflation. City cars with a maximum range of 25 miles at speeds of 5 to 15 mph.

In the states, you don't see anything like mass production and a middle class market for the electric.

From some numbers I've seen, trains are not very efficient for short or medium-distance commuting. If you're worried about energy efficiency, you're actually better off with a car than with light rail or heavy rail, according to some sources.

Here's a table on Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] which gives numbers with rail (both kinds) edging out cars, but with buses doing far, far worse.

Trains just are not efficient for moving light bulky cargo like humans. Especially when they are not capable of taking them to the final destination, and additional means of transportation are still required.

The rate of US car fatalities has plummeted 75% over the past 45 years, largely due to government mandates and the NHTSA. The hundreds of thousands of people who are alive today because of those actions probably don't consider it "nonsense".

Actually history shows that normally people start getting riled and this is when government steps in and acts.

After quality of living started going up people started to no longer feel comfortable with child labor as more people started feeling this way government started to move. When safety is important to the people they get government to start moving. Very rarely does the government get ahead of the people unless it is bad for the people. (Bank bailouts, Government run healthcare),/p>
When the gover

OK, I am a bit unsure of what you expect. Lets say an organization's goal is to reduce waste of truffula trees. They have reduced waste to the point that the harvest of trees is sustainable. If they were to hold a press conference and say we could be defunded, mission accomplished, do you believe the industry would stick to the sustainable practices or revert to ways that are more profitable.

How about this question, what government institution do you think has a goal that is permanently attainable?

My solution: buy a f**king map. Need detailed turn information to your destination? Look up the directions on Google Maps (or similar), print them out, and refer to them while you're at a stop light/sign or have your significant other read them.

Because taking my eyes off the road to refer to maps/printed directions is so much safer than listening to audio directions and occasionally glancing at a TomTom that's mounted right below my rear view mirror, in a position where my eyes don't leave the roadway?

1. Maps suck. Road atlases are only useful for the 20,000 foot view, i.e., which combination of interstates and/or state highways will get me to my destination city. Once I'm in that city I need a street level map if I'm going to find my destintio

(2] -- Call me old-fashioned, but I plan my auto trips so I don't have to have live directions given to me in real-time by something in my dashboard. My solution: buy a f**king map. Need detailed turn information to your destination? Look up the directions on Google Maps (or similar), print them out, and refer to them while you're at a stop light/sign or have your significant other read them.

I generally keep printed maps as a stand by, but I find automated turn by turn navigation to be vastly safer than periodically glancing at a printed map while driving, and often far less stressful than having someone attempt to read a map and give directions verbally. Most people just aren't very good at that.

I'm curious to see what the NHTSA discovers the risk factors are to having significant others attempt to give drivers directions. Or for that matter what the risk factors are for having car stereos,

Look, those dollars are gone. It's over. You're never getting them back. Let them go.

Now, if the government is going to waste the dollars they take I wish they would spend MORE money on silly stuff like this rather than blowing craters in the sand or giving it for free to big banks. Yes, it would be great if this money went to NASA, or disease prevention and cures, or creating a more educated populace, but really, there are so many worse areas they could have spent this time and money, you should be g

Why not? The western European nations enjoy a significantly better standard of living than the US, so they're obviously doing something right. Their main problem seems to have been including some southern and eastern European nations like Greece with crappy economies into their union.

Yeah, a Republican power grab sounds very plausible. We were all just wondering when the President would let his true colors show.

From the second link: "Earlier this year in St. Paul, Minnesota, President Obama and Secretary Foxx promised to present Congress with a multi-year surface transportation reauthorization proposal, and with the unveiling of The GROW AMERICA Act today, they have fulfilled that promise." It is the first sentence on the web page.

I can understand the motivation. People who are entering a new destination to their satnav whilst driving are paying very little attention to the road and are a big hazard.

But the only way to implement it on a handheld device is to restrict by speed. And I quite often like to monitor where I am with GPS when I'm on public transport. So I'd lose that. As would people who are navigating from the passenger seat of a car.

This latter bit is a real problem in our Prius: you can't enter a destination without stopping. It lets you do other things, just not that. Really annoying, because it's almost always the case that when we need to enter directions, we're driving somewhere together. It would be nice if the NHTSA rules allowed for passengers.

My 2006 buick detects if someone is not wearing a seatbelt and turns off the passenger side airbag if no one is in the passenger seat {it didn't come with GPS}. If the GPS is built into the car I see no reason why it couldn't do the same.

You need bricks to put in the car for traction? No, to trick the car into thinking there is someone in the passenger seat so the GPS works when it's not in park.

My 2006 buick detects if someone is not wearing a seatbelt and turns off the passenger side airbag if no one is in the passenger seat

.....WHY??? Sure, it might be unnecessary if no one is sitting there, but what possible benefit is conferred by disabling an airbag?

It might be a child safety thing. An airbag can kill someone below a certain size, especially if they are not wearing a seat belt, so it's likely programmed to disable itself if there is less than e.g. 80 lbs in the passenger seat, or if the belt is not buckled. In those scenarios an airbag deploying would do more harm than good by turning an otherwise low risk slow speed crash into potentially fatal one.

This latter bit is a real problem in our Prius: you can't enter a destination without stopping. It lets you do other things, just not that. Really annoying, because it's almost always the case that when we need to enter directions, we're driving somewhere together. It would be nice if the NHTSA rules allowed for passengers.

Question: Is pulling over for 30 seconds to reprogram your toy really that big a deal?

I tend to work around this problem by planning my trips to unknown territories - this includes Googling my intended route, alternate routes, and taking a bit to study the roadmaps of my destination, to give me a general sense of direction when I get there. If I end up needing to alter the destination address, I always find somewhere safe to pull over, as piloting 2 tons of rolling steel death kind of takes precedent over p

Question: Is pulling over for 30 seconds to reprogram your toy really that big a deal?

When you're driving along an interstate and are trying to figure out what exit has food, yes. Yes, it is. There's no valid reason not to allow a passenger to change the destination while the vehicle is in motion. It's an unnecessary safety misfeature that reduces usability while providing no benefit whatsoever. (The in-dash GPS is pretty much useless for the driver anyway, because it isn't readily visible, and there's

You cannot legislate common sense while driving. the same person who is irresponsible enough to enter in satnav coords at inopportune times while driving is the same mother fucker who'll let his big mac and fries flub his driving. It doesn't make sense to single out one form of distraction because it's new, while grandfathering in other tried and true ways to get people killed on roads (makeup, food, screaming children, pets, sleepiness, daydreaming, boredom etc)

Oh Jesus Christ Nancy. Depending on the situation, looking away from the road for a second or two at a time is fine.I'm sure you've taken your eyes off the road at least once or twice while driving. Whether it is caused by a screaming child, a tomtom or an ipod -- it is truly and utterly irrelevant. My point was that there is some degree of situational awareness needed, and the people who lack this are the ones causing accidents.

Nice selective quote by the way. By leaving off "IE, don't take your eyes

They want to have the authority to regulate apps that after release have been linked to "safety related issues" that have an intended purpose of being used primarily while driving on a road. They're not asking to regulate all cell phones, or twitter, or Facebook use while in a car (yet), what they are asking for is the ability to bitch-slap developers after the fact who create apps that are designed for use while driving yet lead to distractions, ergo creating safety issues for those likely using said app while driving, presumably on a highway. To that end, is someone more likely to be using Navigon, Garmin, TomTom, or the multitude of other apps while going for a walk, or when driving somewhere?

And if they incorporated a "Thank you for using MotionX GPS Lite, before giving your your directions, please watch this YouTube video and answer this quick survey!", should NHTSB or anyone else for that matter have the authority to tell them that that is morally wrong, and potentially unsafe behavior, let alone compel them to take corrective action?

Their request for oversight over this area doesn't seem like a "major" stretch at this point, but it does set a quite unusual precedent that can be used to expand their powers in the future. And as we all have seen in the past, if Government has the potential to grow, it will do so.

And if they incorporated a "Thank you for using MotionX GPS Lite, before giving your your directions, please watch this YouTube video and answer this quick survey!", should NHTSB or anyone else for that matter have the authority to tell them that that is morally wrong, and potentially unsafe behavior, let alone compel them to take corrective action?

In short, yes.

Slightly longer answer, the roads are for use in the public interest. It's not in that interest to have people distracted in this fashion while driving.

I entirely agree that such distractions should not be allowed. However, is this really a problem? Admittedly, I've only been using Google Maps so far, but there's no ads on that. If it isn't actually a problem, then I don't think any regulation is needed.

They want to have the authority to regulate apps that after release have been linked to "safety related issues" that have an intended purpose of being used primarily while driving on a road.

Ultimately though, they only have the authority to regulate what features are sold in cars as they leave the factory (this power derives from the Interstate Commerce Clause). It's up to state governments to set the rules of the road and penalize drivers for breaking those rules. As to whether or not the Constitution allows them the authority to regulate apps isn't so clear. If they are sold commercially in interstate commerce, then they might have such authority, but there might also be First Amendment i

There will likely always be an exception. The car doesn't know that you are the only person in the car, and there is no reason that a passenger can't input nav data while the vehicle is in motion.

This will make for some great action movies though. Imagive the hero doesn't know where he needs to be, but can't stop the vehicle for GPS to work because there is a carload of mafia terrorists chasing him.

Don't worry. The plucky geek sidekick will - via phone - talk him through reprogramming his entire GPS operating system by pushing five buttons in the right order. The sidekick will then try to help more by remotely hacking into and reprogramming the mafia terrorists' car to disable the steering. The hero will berate the sidekick after the car nearly crashes into a bus filled with sweet, innocent children. Thankfully, the hero was able to aim his gun (which only had one bullet left) behind him and hit t

Don't worry. The plucky geek sidekick will - via phone - talk him through reprogramming his entire GPS operating system by pushing five buttons in the right order. The sidekick will then try to help more by remotely hacking into and reprogramming the mafia terrorists' car to disable the steering.

Through a 3D VR interface! Running NMap in a terminal! Using Nintendo PowerGloves for the input, of course.

So what if someone else in the car is looking at the directions while you are driving? Will their ability to look at directions be significantly hampered?

It is a good thing that these Congress people don't have any important things to worry about so they can focus on this ridiculous crap.

In the mean time my car might just drive on an interstate with failing bridges, or into a tunnel with ceiling tiles that could fall at any moment, but focusing on this is obviously the best thing for Congress to do.

As stupid as this is, it will save more lives than any firearms regulation ever will.Keep in mind how you feel about this regulation, then re-evaluate your stance on gun control. You don't have to change your mind, just think about it long and hard. Cars kill far far more people every year than guns ever could. Why allow people to have cars? There's no constitutional right to drive... Banning them would significantly reduce global warming pollutants... Ban cars, force public transport and foot traffic.

Sigh. Assessing a regulation requires you to look at the benefits AND costs. Banning cars would certainly save a lot of lives, but at huge societal costs. Requiring registration of firearms, and tracking transfers, to allow the sources of illegally used firearms to be determined, would have very modest financial cost, and place minimal burdens on the vast majority of law-abiding firearm owners, while making significant progress toward keeping guns out of the hands of people (criminals and the mentally il

Your point would be better taken if you (and I mean the generic you, not you specifically) did not risk others lives by the actions that you take. I'd be perfectly happy to let you do whatever you wish in your vehicle but when a mistake on your part can kill me, then I'm happy to have the government interfere with your ability to do so.

I may have issues with my Ford, but I think they got it right in terms of Navigation. I have little-to-no reason to have to look at my media center. Everything is done by voice (including asking for an address) and the next-step-direction-guide is on my speedometer where I have to glance on occasion anyway.

The only improvement I can think of is a really small projection on the windshield saying "Turn right in 0.7 miles onto Main st"

All voice controlled, so I don't have to even try typing while driving (if I were so inclined). Click my tumb-button on the steering wheel and say "Destination Address" and then state the address when prompted.

The system's voice prompts me on where to turn, and when. Including the street names and exit number.

And instead of having to look too far down at my media player (which I COULD), instead there is a mini direction-reminder on my speedometer. Just saying the name of the next turn's street, distance, and a left-arrow / right-arrow / etc. Since I tend to have to glance down at that every couple of minutes anyway it's no big deal.

unless you miss hearing the last instruction due to external factors or voice text to speech mispronounciation....no nav unit ive seen allows you to just say "say it again" or something, and have the last voice instruction repeated without having to look at and physically interact with the nav unit while driving.

LOL, Salvation Army sign is full-color animated display consisting of Name, Time, and Temp. Didn't know they really needed to drum up new business and a totally unneeded use of color/motion not to mention money. Maybe it is there to create a few more poor disabled people:/

Around 2001 or so I rigged a pair of laptops with GPS and Wifi (high tech!) so they relayed coordinates to each other and ran a star-trek esque battle game. The passenger would hold the laptop which showed the opponents position and shields as well as weapons fire. They would feed information to the driver who would dodge virtual torpedoes.

A few friends of mine tested this out, but I abandoned the project because this surely would have killed people.

Please dont do stupid things like regulate that these devices must disable user interaction when the vehicle is travelling over a speed limit.

Unless the device can accurately detect if there is a passenger or not. This "safety feature" of my cars factory nav/media unit drives me up the wall...the passengers! the passengers! why wont *somebody* please think of the passengers!

They waited until the competition was (largely) eliminated by smartphone apps, and Google and Apple were finally in a position to start monetizing the service again (you used to pay for navigation hardware and/or programs) so we will undoubtedly see worsening map quality since there won't be enough revenue for those greedy sumbitches once the regulations are slathered on.

Call your congress critter and tell him to think long and hard before voting for this act.